https://nostr.ae https://nostr.ae/npub1wz8zfl8azn6qfnx5t5d479wwnf69keeq4amvsp590nvzrunqumrqurnuay https://nostr.ae/nevent1qqsqg5732v9a5z5z6aj0tjzyvfh693dhjnaexaauyqy4gprxgzcpavczypcguf8ul520gpxv63w3khc4e6d8gkm8yzhhdjqxs47dsg0jvrnvvf263h6 In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqs8nenft4xmrfle23e9ckzhlxt5kl63jcd42hgg6a8mvreqfm6szyq2up0g6'>nevent1q…p0g6</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>📅 Original date posted:2015-06-27<br/>📝 Original message:I wish you were just as prudent when you were recommending full RBF to <br/>mining pools.<br/><br/>On 6/27/15 11:21 AM, Peter Todd wrote:<br/>&gt; It&#39;s not a reasonable path forward right now given the lack of testing done with 8MB+ blocks, among many other problems. A way to help make that appear more reasonable would be to setup a 8MB testnet as I suggested, with two years or so of 8MB blocks in history as well as a large UTXO set to test performance characteristics.<br/><br/><br/>-- <br/>Randi Joseph<br/>-------------- next part --------------<br/>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br/>URL: &lt;<a href="http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150627/264e693e/attachment.html&gt">http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150627/264e693e/attachment.html&gt</a>; 2023-06-07T15:40:47Z https://nostr.ae/nevent1qqsxvmqpt6s44grzgrry3pm5kapy6ew5wh4qthr797n2h9kyrdhjekgzypcguf8ul520gpxv63w3khc4e6d8gkm8yzhhdjqxs47dsg0jvrnvvutrt4e In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsft2gk3ekp6eg3r6uxmvs6rjew6fsyzrss8wjswqdh2dmfves6xjcqxyqvu'>nevent1q…yqvu</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>📅 Original date posted:2014-07-04<br/>📝 Original message:Hi All,<br/><br/>This is a bit tangential to the conversation, but since the genesis of <br/>this conversation is Mike&#39;s decentralization blog post, I decided to <br/>post here.<br/><br/>Perhaps the solution to the mining problem lies in the reward structure <br/>rather than in the proof of work/asics.<br/><br/>Is it possible instead to allocate a portion of the reward to &#34; a # of <br/>runner up(s)&#34; even though the runner-up(s) block will be orphaned? For <br/>example, X% of the block reward goes to Y number of runner-ups based on <br/>some type of criteria?<br/><br/>This will appear to be a bit like a tax on the winner, but it could <br/>potentially solve the problem, since a large pool would not want to <br/>split the pool up to solve multiple blocks.<br/><br/>There are some possible downsides, like probably having to keep those <br/>orphaned blocks around in the future, etc.<br/><br/>If this is possible, the question that remains then, what would be the <br/>criteria for the X% payout/allocation?<br/><br/>-Randi 2023-06-07T15:23:37Z